Forecast for Israel, clouds followed by possible catastrophe...

Posted By David Rothkopf Tuesday, March 17, 2009 - 11:57 PM Share

Here's my view of the current state of play with regard to Israel, the Palestinian Territories and related issues in the Middle East. It's a pretty complicated situation so I hope you don't mind if it takes a longish sentence to summarize it: Iraq fatigue plus backlash against the perceived influence of an "Israel Lobby" plus strong sensitivity to the rights of the Palestinian people among influential American liberals plus the ascendancy of Bibi Netanyahu and Avigdor Lieberman in Israel suggest a coming rough patch for U.S.-Israel relations and, by extension, for Israel in general.

The United States will be achingly conciliatory to potential enemies in the region, will actively avoid confrontation and conflict, will bend over backwards to placate Palestinian concerns and inevitably Netanyahu and Lieberman will say and do inflammatory things. (For a good take on this latest bad twist in Israeli politics see "The Lieberman Disaster" by the wise Jeffrey Goldberg.) The biggest problem here is with regard to U.S. attitudes toward Iran where there will be an impulse to play down the linkages between Iran and Hamas and, more importantly (and that's saying something), parse too finely stages of nuclear development. This might mean accepting a nuclear weapons capable Iran even if what that effectively means is putting the brakes on their program at a point where nuclear arms can be created through just several additional months of effort. (Which by the way they will not do in public with a big ribbon cutting ceremony.) The Israelis absolutely will not tolerate this and conflict will ensue. First, the conflict will be political, potentially very intense and may well transform the U.S.-Israeli relationship. Later, the conflict may become military with the Israelis acting (alone or not) against the Iranians. The upside of the overall trend: the U.S. is perceived as more balanced in the region. The downside: the U.S.-Israel relationship is likely to weaken (I know some of you may see that as an upside)...oh, and also, possibly, nuclear Armageddon. The upside on having Netanyahu and Lieberman in charge: they establish a strong negotiating position for Israel. Only Begin could have met with Sadat. The downside: the marginalization of Israel as a legitimate political voice in the region (I know some of you think that has already occurred)...oh, and also, possibly nuclear Armageddon. Have a nice day.

MENAHEM KAHANA/AFP/Getty Images

EXPLORE:IRAN, IRAQ, ISRAEL/PALESTINE, U.S. FOREIGN POLICY

(5)

HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE

HKEIRC

11:36 PM ET

March 17, 2009

You Lost me at:

"the wise Jeffrey Goldberg"

NOAMS

4:26 PM ET

March 18, 2009

it might go the other way as well

I think an Iranian bomb won’t cause Israel to break up with the US; quite the opposite: it will make Israel more dependent on America.

TESS

5:16 PM ET

March 18, 2009

The author says: "The biggest

The author says: "The biggest problem here is with regard to U.S. attitudes toward Iran where there will be an impulse to play down the linkages between Iran and Hamas "....

I don't know how we can fail to note this, we indirectly encouraged it. If you remember well, during the period the Palestinian "suitcase" economy, the Hamas funders were most Saudi Arabia and the Sunnis. Logical, since Hamas is a Sunni organization. The USA then put pressure on SA to respect the economic blockade of the Hamas led PA government. That is when Hamas turned to Iran. That then caused many in the Arab world to view the 2006 wars (operations) as a proxy between Iran and the USA.

The problem on the Iran-USA front is that we need safe passage for goods and supplies for our troops in Afghanistan. Our supply lines through Pakistan are continuously challenged by the Taliban (Sunni) operating in that nation. We have considered Iran's help in supplying those troops. The USA actually could benefit its own interests by making some kind of deal with Iran. Which according to an FP briefing I received, we considered just prior to re-instituting sanctions.

Lastly, I know the post is about Israel, but I still think it relevant to point out that nation's tend to act in their own self interest. While we may only care, either for the sake of discussion or our own interests, about Israel, it is wise to consider the environment other states are in when considering their choices. More than likely, they are responding to more stimuli than a narrow view could perceive. A policy designed to change an initiative needs to encompass a total solution to the rationale for why a nation originally chose that course of action in the first place.

THESCUDSTUD88

11:28 PM ET

March 19, 2009

I'm pretty sure Jeffery

I'm pretty sure Jeffery Goldberg and Wise is a contradiction which could very well cause an Armageddon on its own.

REXW

2:57 AM ET

March 22, 2009

Israel, the first day of the rest of you life.

As a newcomer both to Foreign Policy but more so to David Rothkopf and still able to view such comments without too much emotion, I can't help but ask why we never see the status between Israel and Iran in a fair way. The concern about Iran and its interest in nuclear capability, if this is indeed the case, and Israel with 200 plus warheads, never seems to get a mention. To me that seems to be crucial to the debate. But in Israel's case, it is not just the warheads, it is also giving the finger to the NPT in no uncertain terms. Even such unstable countries as Pakistan with the good Dr. Khan, now released from detention after his sales campaign on behalf of nuclear technology, never seems to warrant a mention in relation to the fear of nuclear proliferation. So its not nuclear proliferation that Israel fears in its unique position as a non-signatory to the NPT, loaded for war with nuclear missiles, it is nuclear expansion........ but just Iran.
Sitting as I am between the Indian and Pacific oceans, the middle east geography is a long way away, but here's how it seems to me.
Iran will see the value in becoming a trading partner and friend with the US. The people of Iran surely do not want to see their country destroyed by nuclear war, albeit even just with Israel. They are relatively stable, have guaranteed revenues and wealth from oil and are much more western in their thinking than many other countries. They are questionably the most important Arab nation, yes, even including Saudi Arabia whose dalliance with Bush and his henchmen did nothing to improve their status within the Arab nations. Iran is also respected and this is very important. They are now and will continue to be even more so, a cultural leader in the middle east. A country like that with so much potential, so many good objectives such as education, standard of living and family values has the potential of giving so much to the rest of the world. Barak Obama has stated quite clearly that he intends to set talks in place so the continual threats of an attack from Israel are counterproductive. Because of this, the zealous new right wing government of Israel should listen to the more than 50% of their people who didn't support them and adjust their belligerence accordingly. Sadly, all the world ever sees is the leadership of Israel, not the real strength, the people and like people everywhere, yes, even in Iran, they all want the same thing......peace and friendship.
Give it a real chance, Israel and you will start to win some long term friends. Right now, world opinion probably has Israel as the most disliked country in the world. Iran isn't, even with the Israeli PR machine running at full tilt. That must mean something, surely.
Obama has opened the door. Shut up and let him have a chance. Discontinue the funding of malleable Senators and Representatives and let the US government determine their own correct policies, free of your not-so-subtle pressure.
The holocaust spectre is almost 65 years old and the world does not owe you a living. In fact, it really owes you nothing but respect and you have to earn that.